Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to the withdrawal of the rule relating to "The Fair Credit Reporting Act's Limited Preemption of State Laws".
- Sponsor
- Rep. Waters, Maxine [D-CA-43]
- Committees
- Financial Services Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Apr 30, 2026
Bottom line
This resolution uses the Congressional Review Act to reverse a Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection rule, thereby reinstating a prior interpretation of federal preemption over state consumer credit reporting laws.
What it actually does
This joint resolution, introduced under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), seeks to disapprove a specific rule issued by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (BCFP). The rule in question, published on May 12, 2025, withdrew a previous BCFP rule concerning "The Fair Credit Reporting Act's Limited Preemption of State Laws." If enacted, H.J. Res. 170 would nullify the BCFP's withdrawal rule, effectively reinstating the prior interpretation regarding FCRA's preemption of state laws.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the BCFP's withdrawal rule undermined consumer protections by potentially limiting states' ability to enact stronger credit reporting laws. They contend that congressional disapproval is necessary to restore the original intent of allowing states more flexibility to protect consumers from predatory practices and ensure fair credit reporting.
Opponents contend
Opponents of this resolution (and thus, proponents of the BCFP's withdrawal rule) would argue that the BCFP's action provided necessary clarity and uniformity in credit reporting regulations, preventing a patchwork of state laws that could create compliance burdens for businesses operating across state lines. They might assert that the federal standard under FCRA is sufficient and that state-level variations could hinder efficient credit markets.
The bill text is extremely short and can be read in seconds, making it highly accessible for evaluation.
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the rule...
Disapproval of BCFP Rule on FCRA Preemption Withdrawal
This provision states that Congress formally rejects and nullifies a specific rule issued by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. The rule being disapproved was itself a withdrawal of an earlier rule that clarified the limited extent to which the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) preempts, or overrides, state laws. By disapproving the withdrawal, this resolution effectively reinstates the original BCFP interpretation that FCRA's preemption of state laws is limited, allowing states more room to legislate on credit reporting.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that this disapproval protects states' rights to enact stronger consumer protections regarding credit reporting, ensuring that federal law does not unduly restrict states from addressing local consumer needs or emerging issues. They believe it empowers states to innovate in consumer protection.
Critics contend
Opponents argue that disapproving the BCFP's withdrawal rule creates regulatory uncertainty and a fragmented legal landscape for credit reporting agencies and lenders. They contend that a uniform federal standard is more efficient and prevents compliance burdens that could ultimately harm consumers through increased costs or reduced access to credit.
Tradeoffs
The resolution navigates the tension between the desire for uniform federal regulation to ease compliance for national businesses and the principle of states' rights to enact potentially stronger, tailored consumer protections. It also highlights the ongoing debate over the appropriate balance of power between federal agencies and Congress in setting regulatory policy.